Execution in Iraq

Ifty, You are obviously a man of conscience, and feel very strongly about the issues. Thank you, at least you are addressing the topic, and trying to apply your logic to it.

I firmly believe (although I haven't seen it with my own eyes), that you are correct when you say that those who believe and are peacefull cannot influence those who want to kill. You are probably closer to the realities of Islamic code and attitudes than most of us.

But, if we all say that we cannot change those who would go from their families and friends to the middle east to fight and kill the infidels, then we have failed in our beliefs. We should never say that we cannot change people. It happens all the time.....just as those who come from good homes and apply their religion faithfully, would never go to kill infidels, just because they see it on TV, and hear about it daily...........but they do!

This current upsurge in religion, especially islamic, is (I believe) caused by a dissatisfaction with western values and life. But nobody made anybody accept the western values and life styles. I personally, don't like the current trends in our society either. But I an civilised enough to know that it can be changed without recourse to violence or political activity.

Those of us who are old enough know that if we change our children, and they change their children....the we can set the example that can change other children... ad infinitum. Unfortunately the press and media make the battle even more difficult by pedling tripe at every opportunity...but that's another story. My sons and my grandchildren have an honest and open viewpoint, but one thing they learnt for sure is: "the difference between WRONG and RIGHT"
 
I hope that I can bring up my children to live as I would want them to, but there are so many outside influences these days. As you say the press and media make the battle very difficult. I have friends who have done their best to bring their children up with the values they would like them to have throughout life but sadly that doesn't stop one or two of them "going off the rails". I find myself struggling. Even at school they are influenced by the people they come into contact with - even the teachers in some cases.
 
It is easy to make sweeping generalisations about people and events, easy, but wrong. The current discussions concerning the IRA are a case in point. The Irish situation has its roots in history and is more about the conquest and subjugation of Ireland by England than it is about religion. There are similar simmering resentments in Scotland and Wales and also to a lesser extent in Cornwall and Brittany. The Basque region of Spain is another example.

There is a wealth of evidence to support the idea that this is a common trait in peoples of the P1, P2 and P3 Celtic groups. It makes little difference what the current issue of contention is. They would argue about what day it was if there was nothing more convenient to hand and still come out of the argument feeling cheated at having been proved either wrong or right. Moreover, they will still be arguing on Judgement Day and I have no doubt that they will all feel equally as hard done by then too.

Occasionally the arguments become heated and get out of hand. In the past it was limited to a bit of a punch up and stealing cattle. Irish and Welsh poetry of the dark ages is full of that sort of thing. Here, in the north of England, we are familiar with Scottish border raiders, who came south to steal a few cows and cause a bit of an upset.

The ready supply of armaments in the twentieth century has added a more deadly edge to the tenor of these arguments and has caused horrific injury and untold misery. But the arguments continue, going round and round in pointless circles.

To say that the conflict is primarily a clash of religions misses the point entirely. To use the current conflict in Ireland as an analogy, when considering the actions of Islamic extremists is a mistake.



Before any of you leap to the defence of the old country, please bear in mind that I have Irish and Breton antecedents, and thus I know whereof I speak – Dear God, do I know!
 
I also have Irish roots and have opinions on the IRA which I won't go into here beyond saying that anything which calls itself the IRA these days is far removed from what that organisation originally was.

It's not so much about the subjugation of Ireland by England as the retention of the six northern counties when partition took place. The "Irish question" as it used to be known is a very complex one and isn't helped by people constantly reliving the past. We live in the present and the only place we can go from here is the future.
 
Fair points Willow, but isn't it also true that to know where you are and where you are going you must also know where you have been?
 
Knowing where you've been isn't the same as keep trying to go back there and blame the past for all today's ills instead of getting on with it and trying to make improvements. It would be impossible to please everyone in most situations but the Irish one even more so.

I remember seeing a documentary once about how people deal with traumatic childhood experiences. Some dwell on it and blame the past for everything that goes wrong in their lives. Others grow from it and use their experience to benefit others. You can't change the past but you can change how you respond to it and where you go from there.
 
Quite so Darby. My apologies to all for straying off thread. Let's return to the matter in hand.

It is said that since the Koran was dictated by God that not a single word of it may be altered. Would someone then enlighten me concerning the Saudi funding of the Wahhabi version of the Koran which is distributed free, or at little cost throughout the world. To my way of thinking, it is to this version that we owe a large measure of the upsurge in Islamic fundamentalism. It will not be forgotten at this juncture that bin Laden is also from Saudi Arabia.

"The Wahhabi Koran is notable in that, while Muslims believe that their sacred text was dictated by God and cannot be altered, the Saudi English version adds to the original so as to change its sense in a radical direction. For example, the opening chapter, or surah, is known as Fatiha, and is recited in Muslim daily prayer and (among non-Wahhabis) as a memorial to the dead. The four final lines of Fatiha read, in a normal rendition of the Arabic original (such as this translation by N.J. Dawood, published by Penguin Books): Guide us to the straight path, / The path of those whom You have favored, / Not of those who have incurred Your wrath, / Nor of those who have gone astray.
The Wahhabi Koran renders these lines: Guide us to the Straight Way. / The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who have earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians). The Wahhabi Koran prints this translation alongside the Arabic text, which contains no reference to either Jews or Christians.
There is nothing to indicate to the uninformed reader that these interpolations, printed in parentheses, are absent from the Arabic. The reader encountering Islam for the first time, as well as the Muslim already indoctrinated in Wahhabism, is led to believe that the Koran denounces all Jews and Christians, which it does not.

There are, of course, many individuals who are unprepared to read this translation with a critical eye. This is especially true wherever Wahhabis conduct the missionary outreach called dawa--above all in prisons in Europe, the United States and elsewhere. Indeed, it is to just such readers that this edition is directed. The Wahhabi Koran is also a mainstay of Muslim student groups on campuses throughout the West.
Distortions of the text stating or implying that God has condemned the Jews and Christians are scattered throughout the Wahhabi Koran. Notably, they invert the meaning of the several verses that express respect for the "People of the Book," the Jews and Christians. Thus, verse 2:62 in its authentic form states: Believers, Jews, Christians, and Sabaeans--whoever believes in God and the Last Day and does what is
right--shall be rewarded by their Lord. (The Sabaeans were followers of an ancient religion impossible to identify clearly today.) In the Saudi English translation, this passage is footnoted to declare, No other religion except Islam will be accepted from anyone, although no such statement appears in the Arabic.
The standard translation of verse 3:113 reads: There are among the People of the Book some upright men who all night long recite the revelations of God and worship Him, who believe in God and the Last Day, who enjoin justice and forbid evil.
The Saudi translation again inserts verbiage hostile to non-Muslims. In the Wahhabi Koran, the upright Jews and Christians turn out to be those who convert to Islam: those enjoining Islamic Monotheism and following Prophet Muhammad and not opposing Prophet Muhammad. To repeat, where the Arabic text actually praises pious Jews and Christians, the Wahhabi English version praises only Jews and Christians who become Muslims.
The original verse 5:65 says of the Jews and Christians: If they observe the Torah and the Gospel and what is revealed to them from their Lord, they shall enjoy abundance.
The Wahhabi edition adds that, in addition to Jews' observing the Torah and Christians' the New Testament, both must accept the Koran--that is, become Muslims--which nowhere appears in the Arabic text and conflicts with traditional Islamic theology. Mainstream Islam treats the Torah, the New Testament, and the Koran as different books. Wahhabism, by contrast, treats the Jewish and Christian scriptures as primitive editions of the Islamic text.
And, inevitably, the Wahhabi Koran adds language aggravating Muslim-Jewish controversies. Verse 17:1 refers to the night journey, an out-of-body experience in which the Prophet Muhammad was taken on a magical steed to a site called in the standard text the farther Temple. The Wahhabi translation alters this to stake the Islamic claim to Jerusalem. It refers to Muhammad's journey by night from Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah) to the farthest mosque (in Jerusalem).
Contempt for non-Muslims suffuses Saudi translations of the Islamic holy book.The same bigotry is integral to the creed taught at the Imam Mohammed Ibn-Saud Islamic University and spread around the world by preachers and missionaries funded by the Saudi royal family."

Schwartz,S. Rewriting the Koran: A bigoted Saudi Translation

The Weekly Standard (US) 27/09/04
 
Last edited:
Once again A-Bob, excellent stuff and right on the nail.

What about us non-believers though? Or those of another religion?

I think we are down-and-out Infidels.....We don't deserve to live??

Well researched A-Bob....I like it!!! Respect!!
 
I rather think that we are included among those who are "gone astray". How very careless and cavalier of us.
 
The other thing that puzzles me about religion, in general, is this: If The deity is, supposedly, omniscient then it already knows how this is all going to turn out and has always known. It has always known who the good ones are and who the sinners are, who tried their best and who just paid lip service to the idea.
If this is already known then what is the point?
Why make such a song and dance about giving us free will, when it is so blatantly nothing of the kind? And what's with the charade of giving us Christians his only son to die for our sins. It's very considerate, I'm sure, but as offers go it seems a bit illogical to go to such extremes when as an omnipotent being you could, if you chose, wipe them out anyway.

And another thing, why does revelation of any kind have to be delivered in such ridiculously ambiguous language. If you are going to give the plot away, then give it away, I see little point or sense in all this coquettish mystification. All it does is serve to sow dissention and discord because people cannot agree on what it all means.
 
So if you put it in context marketing was around in 0000, I will give you my only son to die for you and therefore you will follow me for a few thousand years, when in reality he couldnt die as he was part of the "family".
Wonder how he conviced him to do it?
It'll be fine JC, the nails may hurt a bit but hey you gotta give em something. After Moses screwed up th fifteen commandments were losing in the diety stakes. Do it for the family.
 
Are you confusing "all knowing" with fortunetelling A-b? Knowing what everyone is up to isn't the same as knowing what they are going to do at every given opportunity. I like to know what my kids are getting up to and I like to think that I know how they will react to a given situation, but I am also prepared to allow them a certain amount of freedom of choice and hope that they make the choices I approve of.

I wish I could explain myself more eloquently because there is a great deal I would like say but just don't know how to explain it properly.
 
Acrylic-bob said:
Why make such a song and dance about giving us free will, when it is so blatantly nothing of the kind? And what's with the charade of giving us Christians his only son to die for our sins. It's very considerate, I'm sure, but as offers go it seems a bit illogical to go to such extremes when as an omnipotent being you could, if you chose, wipe them out anyway.
Click to expand...
You seem to have contradicted yourself here. Yes of course God could have chosen to wipe out the consequences of all sin but in doing so would it really have taught anyone anything? Would anyone have any incentive not to sin? You claim that our free-will is blatantly nothing of the kind and yet the suggestion you make would certainly be just that - we would not be free agents, free to choose between right and wrong as we currently are.

Isn't it better that we have the chance to learn? Oh and BTW he didn't give his son to "us Christians" Christ gave his life for the whole of humanity - Christianity hadn't been invented then.


Acrylic-bob said:
And another thing, why does revelation of any kind have to be delivered in such ridiculously ambiguous language. If you are going to give the plot away, then give it away, I see little point or sense in all this coquettish mystification. All it does is serve to sow dissention and discord because people cannot agree on what it all means.
Click to expand...
The basic Gospel is plain as a pike staff (come to think of it - what is a pike staff and exactly how plain is one?)

See what I mean? When the various books of the Bible were written the wording and style of writing was clear to those who wrote it. They used terminology of their day in much the same way we do. I don't even know what a pike staff is and yet I used reference to it in order to emphasise my point.

The basic truths of Christian scripture are so plain and simple that people miss them.
1. Believe that Jesus Christ is the Saviour.
2. Repent of all wrong doing
3. Change your ways and follow him
4. Be guided by the Holy Spirit

The rest follows.

And on the subject of Commandements, although we were originally given 10, these were added to and embellished to such an extent during Old Testament times that Jesus had a thing or two to say on the subject himself. He boiled it all down to two basic principles.
1. Love God
2. Love other people

Yes, I'm a Christian and I'm willing to say so categorically and I feel great sorrow when I read posts ridiculing the sacrifice Christ was willing to endure on behalf of all of us. I may not be very popular for saying this but I'm more than willing to be unpopular in this instance.
 
Darby said:
A-Bob and Willow........The Irish thing is a non-discussion event.....
Click to expand...
Not even in a new thread? I don't see anyone else objecting. Funnily enough it hasn't even been objected to by moderators as a threadwander. Perhaps it had a valid place in the general theme of the discussion.
 
The basic truths of Christian scripture are so plain and simple that people miss them.
1. Believe that Jesus Christ is the Saviour.
2. Repent of all wrong doing
3. Change your ways and follow him
4. Be guided by the Holy Spirit

But christianity has told so many lies and hasnt followed these rules themselves. History has proved someone around the time of Christ was a leader and as the Romans put it a rabal rouser, was he born on 25 dec? all proof is probably march but changed to fit in with pagan beliefs, his entry in to Jeruslem not spring (easter) more like July/Aug again changed to take over a pagan festival.
The pope is the leader of the christians but what a history The concern about papal weakness after the debacle of the Great Schism caused Renaissance popes to emphasize the consolidation of their political position first, followed by religious reforms. The second and last of the Spanish popes literally bought his pontificate with bribes. Such a purchased election is called "simoniacal," and was easily accomplished with the greed of seventeen of the twenty-two cardinals.
During the Inquisition, the Catholic religion killed millions. Why? Primarily to suppress any and all opposition to the pope. Side "benefits" included taking the material wealth of its victims and showing the pope's power. The Catholic Inquisitors tortured, crippled, burned, and imprisioned millions of people. Whatever happened to love your enemies? (Matthew 5:44)
Call priests father, e.g., Father McKinley
Matthew 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.



​
 
I’m sorry Gobsmacked, I don’t agree.

The adjective “omniscient” means, according to OED, “knowing everything”.
If you read what I wrote you will see that I attempted to posit the idea that the whole performance is pointless, from beginning to end. What is the point of setting humanity the challenge of learning anything if it is already known who will learn and who will not and also to whatever degree. A bit like setting children an exam, when you already have the results in your hand.
What is the point of saying to humanity “ you have the freedom to sin or not to sin” and sitting there smugly stroking your white beard because you know which ones are going to sin and which are not. And what is then the point of sending a Messiah who will suffer death to remit the sins of humanity and then insist that you should still atone for those sins, and, moreover, one who will save all those who came after him but not the ones that went before. Talk about Indian giving. I have the distinct feeling that we are being played with here, either that or the four evangelists were making it up as they went along.
(BTW a pikestaff is a wooden pole about 12 to 15 feet long often with a nasty, sharp, metal stabbing bit on the end, very much the WMD of the 15th to 17th centuries. Beefeaters carry shortened versions.)
The basic gospel is as plain as a pikestaff is it? Well, yes, I suppose it is.

Luke 22:36. “Then he said unto them, but now, he that hath a purse, let him take it and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword let him sell his garment to buy one”.


Matt 10:34-35. “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace but a sword. For I am come to set a man at varience against his father, and the daughter against the mother, and the daughter in law against the mother in law”.

Luke 12:52 “For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three”.

Mark 4:9-12 “And he said unto them, he that hath ears to hear, let him hear. And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked him of the parable. And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, these things are done in parables: That seeing they may see and not perceive. And hearing they may hear and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted and their sins should be forgiven them”.

Luke 14:26 “If any man come to me and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and bretheren, and sisters, yea and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple”.

I could go on but I think that will do for now. “The basic truths of Christian Scripture are so plain and simple that people miss them.” Are they, are they indeed?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top